Exploring the Connection Between Higgs Field and Decoherence

[Maui]

Is the interaction with the Higgs field helping/causing the process of decoherence?

 

[limarodessa]

Is the interaction with the Higgs field helping/causing the process of decoherence?

Decoherence? Why ? How ?

 

[Raekwon]

Is the interaction with the Higgs field helping/causing the process of decoherence?

In short, yes. Any interaction with any field will cause decoherence. In this case, it'll be very weak.

 

[Maui]

Decoherence? Why ? How ?

What why? Field interactions cause decoherence, that's how coherent superpositional states supposedly lose their coherence.

 

[Maui]

In short, yes. Any interaction with any field will cause decoherence. In this case, it'll be very weak.

I think this Higgs boson discovery poses more challenges to having a realistic and comprehensible ontological picture of reality. Nothing in it reminds even remotely of what common people in the street expect of this mass gaining mechanism. It pushes us even further away from the falimilar classical concepts and now we have even more evidence that the weirdness is correct.

 

[limarodessa]

What why? Field interactions cause decoherence, that's how coherent superpositional states supposedly lose their coherence.

Mikhail B Menskii 2000 Phys.-Usp. 43 585

This
approach considers the closed system that includes the
measured subsystem, the measuring device, the observer Р
in short, all theUniverse, the whole world. Accordingly, there
is no decoherence, and there is nothing to transform the
superposition of alternative pure states into a mixture.

 

[Maui]

Mikhail B Menskii 2000 Phys.-Usp. 43 585

So this opinion is that decoherence is a cover up of the consciousness causes collapse theory. I don't have access to this paid-for article but i suspect the author has overlooked something big(e.g. the experiments realized in isolating systems from the environment)

 

[limarodessa]

... Any interaction with any field will cause decoherence. In this case, it'll be very weak.

... Field interactions cause decoherence, that's how coherent superpositional states supposedly lose their coherence.

I am not assured

[/PLAIN]
Phys. Rev. A 83, 052312 (2011)

Up to now, the lifetime of experimentally demonstrated entangled states has been limited due to their fragility under decoherence and dissipation. Therefore, they are created under strict isolation conditions. In contrast, new approaches harness the coupling of the system to the environment, which drives the system into the desired state. Following these ideas, we present a robust method for generating steady-state entanglement between two distant atomic ensembles. The proposed scheme relies on the interaction of the two atomic systems with the common vacuum modes of an electromagnetic field which act as an engineered environment. We develop the theoretical framework for two-level systems, including dipole-dipole interactions, and complement it by considering its implementation in multilevel ground states. Based on these results, the realization of entanglement generation by engineered dissipation has been experimentally demonstrated

[/PLAIN]
Optics Communications Volume 133, Issues 1–6, 1 January 1997, Pages 142–146

We propose a method to generate the entangled quantum states of a field via the nonresonant interaction of a two-level atom with a two-mode field. When the detuning between the atomic transition frequency and the frequency of each mode is much larger than the coupling constant, the photon statistical distribution of the field will not be changed during the interaction of the atom with the field, while the phase of the field will evolve with time. By state-selective measurements on the atom, we can produce the entangled coherentstates of the field if the two modes of the field are both in the coherentstates initially. Entanglements of other states can also be generated by this method.

 

[Maui]

I am not assured

[/PLAIN]
Phys. Rev. A 83, 052312 (2011)
[/PLAIN]
Optics Communications Volume 133, Issues 1–6, 1 January 1997, Pages 142–146

How do entagled states relate to decoherence? AFAIK, entanglement 'link' is not lost due to decoherence, as the paired particles(their correlated properties) were never in superposition(i could be wrong depending on the interpretation). What are you trying to say?

 

[Fiziqs]

How do entagled states relate to decoherence? AFAIK, entanglement 'link' is not lost due to decoherence, as the paired particles(their correlated properties) were never in superposition(i could be wrong depending on the interpretation).

I'm confused, isn't every particle, whether it's entangled or not, in a state of superposition? Doesn't HUP imply that until we measure it, every particle is in a state of superposition, and doesn't the double slit experiment merely demonstrate the validity of this point?

 

[Maui]

I'm confused, isn't every particle, whether it's entangled or not, in a state of superposition?

You mean i am the only one NOT in superposition? Because that follows from that premise, since as far as we know, a human body can't function while in superposition.

Doesn't HUP imply that until we measure it, every particle is in a state of superposition, and doesn't the double slit experiment merely demonstrate the validity of this point?

This viewpoint is frowned upon, it leaves no room for other observers or a reality of some sort. It's easy to see that if you don't believe in decoherence you'll have trouble relating to the outside world of observations.

 

[Fiziqs]

You mean i am the only one NOT in superposition? Because that follows from that premise, since as far as we know, a human body can't function while in superposition.

Not necessarily, there are things about which you can know their state, without actually having to observe them. For instance, if you roll a six on a regular die, then you know without looking that there is a one on the bottom. In a sense the two things are entangled. Knowing the state of one will automatically tell you the state of the other. Or if you put a penny, heads up, in a box and close the lid, if you do nothing to disturb the box then you know that heads will still be up when you open the lid again. So there are things that can be known based upon their relationship to something else, and there are things that can be known based upon the state that they were in, in the past. Things must be temporally consistent. How they are now must be consistent with how they were in the past. (And possibly the future, but that's another discussion entirely)

There are two things that we know to be absolutely true. One, if the information is available to you, such that you can know the state of something, either directly or indirectly, then that thing can be in no other state. And two, the states that something can be in, must be consistent with the states that it, or something that it is entangled with, was known to be in, in the past.

So this complicated web of direct and indirect knowledge, and temporal consistency, means that you are surrounded by a system which is not in a state of superposition. At least not on a macro-scale. The question is, how far does this system extend? What about those things which you have never seen, and of which you have no direct knowledge about their past or current states? Like how much toilet paper is left on the roll in a bathroom in a train station in Mexico City. Others have seen it though, they may even be looking at right now. But are the observations of another conscious observer sufficient to destroy the superposition of an object, relative to you? And what about a simple particle, is one particle interacting with a system about which you have no knowledge, and from which you gain no knowledge via the interaction, also sufficient to destroy the superposition relative to you? The simple answer is, we don't know.

These are question to which we currently have no answers. To what extent, is the world around me "real", and to what extent is it in a state of superposition?
Those things we don't know, but what we do know is, that everything about which you have the information available to you concerning its state, is absolutely in that state. But as far as everything else, we simply don't know.

.

 

[Maui]

And what about a simple particle, is one particle interacting with a system about which you have no knowledge, and from which you gain no knowledge via the interaction, also sufficient to destroy the superposition relative to you? The simple answer is, we don't know.

It's too conspirational to suppose otherwise. Here is the best experiment to date with large, almost classical obejcts(430-atom molecules) that had to be isolated from the environment to demonstrate quantum behavior:

"We show that even
complex systems, with more than 1,000 internal degrees of freedom, can be prepared in
quantum states that are sufficiently well isolated from their environment to avoid decoherence
and to show almost perfect coherence."

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v2/n4/pdf/ncomms1263.pdfThere is only one way to avoid decoherence and since keeping a system in coherent quantum state is very difficult, i maintain that the higgs field is likely a contributing factor to decoherence.